Teaching Lab NYC District 11 - IS 355, NY Report

Methodology and Presentation of Results

We have provided two types of results for each section: The results in the first three columns of the table refer to the overall group averages. We provide the group average for the diagnostic and follow-up surveys as well as the percentage point change (increase or decrease) over this time. It is important to note that the group that completed the diagnostic survey and the group that completed the follow-up survey are different in size. The results in the fourth column reflect the percentage of educators who improved their responses or sustained the highest level response from the diagnostic to follow-up survey. This group of educators is the same for both surveys and is smaller in size.

Section 1: Mindsets and Beliefs

Educators were asked a series of questions about their mindsets toward instruction and students on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. The questions focused on four core constructs surrounding mindsets and beliefs, specifically the recognition of race and culture, growth mindsets, high expectations, and taking accountability for equitable instruction.

The plot illustrates educators’ average scores from the diagnostic and follow-up surveys, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the average scores.

Section 2: School Environment

Educators were asked about their school environment, including culture and climate on a 5-point Likert scale from 1- Strongly disagree to 5- Strongly agree. Specifically, educators were asked about trust and connectedness to other educators, their role in shaping their own professional learning, and confidence in implementing the curriculum in a way that maximizes positive impact for student learning.

The plot illustrates the shifts in educators’ reported culture and climate, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage of educators with positive perceptions in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who agreed or strongly agreed with the items.

Section 3: Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Educators were asked a series of questions about their knowledge of instructional shifts and evidence-based instructional practices in their content area.

Section 3a: ELA Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge

In ELA, the questions focused on seven core constructs, as shown in the table.

The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for ELA content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.

Section 3b: Math Content and Pedagogical Content Knowledge

In Mathematics, the questions focused on four core constructs, as shown in the table.

The plot illustrates the shift in educators’ average scores for Math content and pedagogical content knowledge, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the diagnostic scores, and blue represents the follow-up scores. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease of average scores.

Section 4: Teacher Observations by Administrators

Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked about the areas they focus on when observing teachers in general and also whether they observe differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not.

First, coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were asked whether they focus on the following areas when observing teachers: The lesson is focused on a high-quality text or task. The questions and tasks address the analytical thinking required by the grade-level standards. All students have opportunities to engage in the work of the lesson.

The plot illustrates the shifts in coaches, leaders, and/or administrators’ reported observation practices, which corresponds to the information in the first three columns of the table. Orange represents the percentage who always or almost always focus on these aspects in the diagnostic survey, and blue represents the percentage in the follow-up survey. The arrows represent the directionality, showing an increase or decrease in the percent of educators who always or almost always focus on these aspects.

Coaches, leaders, and/or administrators were also asked to compare teaching practices between Teaching Lab participants and non-Teaching Lab participants in the follow-up survey. They were asked about the same three areas above.

The graph illustrates the differences in teaching practices between teachers who have participated in Teaching Lab professional learning and teachers who have not, as reported by the coaches, leaders, and/or administrators.

Section 5: Lab Leaders

Lab Leaders were asked about their engagement in different activities, such as leading professional learning, leading PLC meetings, coaching teachers, sharing information and resources, and improving their own instructional practices.

The graph below illustrates the Lab Leaders participation in different activities.

Section 6: Student Work

No student work was analyzed at this location.

Section 7: Participant Feedback

Looking at participant feedback from NYC District 11 - IS 355, NY we see good scores across the board:

Finally, looking at the textual feedback from participants we also see a lot of positive feedback, even when people are giving tips for improvement